commentCanada Puts Chemicals Under Scrutiny
ICanada’s Prime Minister Stephen Harper unveiled a new Chemicals Management Plan in December 2006, in which the government would put CA$300 million towards the assessment of about 4,000 substances over four years. As part of its plan, the government has launched a new website where citizens can learn about the chemicals and track the assessment process.
The new plan grows out of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA), passed in 1999, which called for the screening of 23,000 substances that were introduced to the market before 1986. Canada did not begin more intensive pre-market risk assessment procedures until 1994, and CEPA does not address substances introduced in the interim.
The preliminary screening was completed in September 2006, with the substances categorized by their toxicity. Approximately 4,000 substances were marked as needing further attention because they were deemed to be persistent or bioaccumulative and inherently toxic to the environment or because they were inherently toxic to humans or offered great potential for human exposure.
Based on what you have seen and read about this project, how would you grade it? Use the stars below to indicate your assessment, five stars being the highest rating.
According to Alex Zimmerman of Applied Green Consulting, based in Victoria, British Columbia, the new plan is a somewhat hollow move by a government for which “environmental issues are an immediate political problem.” Even as he expresses skepticism, however, Zimmerman says he sees hope in the new plan.
“Although it is long overdue and I would like to see more urgent action,” he says, “it is a good first step towards getting the more toxic chemicals out of the ecosphere.” He adds that the plan moves Canada towards “shifting the burden of proof of safety from government to industry.”
Even as CEPA moves forward, however, over 700 scientists have signed an open letter urging the government to rewrite the law. The scientists call for increased attention to vulnerable ecosystems such as the Great Lakes, stricter timelines for the provisions in the law, and a stronger requirement placing the burden of proof on industry.
The letter suggests that Canada should follow the lead of the European Union, which voted to adopt the Registration, Evaluation, and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) regulations in December 2006. REACH calls for the registration of approximately 30,000 substances over 11 years, relying on the chemicals industry to provide data proving the safety of each substance. The regulation also allows for partial or total bans of substances deemed to present unacceptable risks to the public.
According to Ian Theaker, LEED project manager with the Canada Green Building Council (CaGBC), Canada is “straddling the fence” between requiring industry to prove a chemical safe and relying on the government to do so. He speculates that the government would proceed cautiously in regulating substances, saying that, although it’s too soon to tell how regulations would play out, “opposition from industry and NAFTA [North American Free Trade Agreement] countries could slow things down.”
Theaker also suggests the government’s new plan is good news for the green building industry. “It’s a move towards the government embracing the precautionary principle,” he says, adding, “Life-cycle assessment is going to be very hot.” Theaker suggests CaGBC would attempt to stay one step ahead of the government. “It’s going to take time for the government to profile all of the substances,” he argues, “and we want to reward people for doing the right thing.”
For more information:
Chemical Substances Portal
Ottawa, Ontario
www.chemicalsubstances.gc.caCEPA Registry Office
Gatineau, Quebec
www.ec.gc.ca/CEPARegistryEuropean Commission (Environment)
Brussels, Belgium
ec.europa.eu/environment.index_en.htm
|
|
